THIS IS A COMPILATION OF A RUNNING ARGUMENT I'VE BEEN HAVING WITH AN ANTI-WAR LEFTIE FRIEND OF MINE:
Was it wrong to invade, or just done badly?
It was done badly, and it was wrong. Bush lied. And we're losing.
If it was wrong and done badly, should we pull out or try to get it right -as we seem to be now?
We should pull out - I mean redeploy; there's no chance we can make a positive difference. It's too late.
Is that because of us or them?
Both: our occupation inspires hatred, and they are not ready for democracy and the rule of mutually confirmed law.
Are they not ready because of years of oppression or centuries of Islam?
Both; they are not ready and you can't force people to be democratic.
Then why should the west accept any Muslims from historically Muslim nations which have been historically oppressed and whose citizens can't seem to accept self-rule? Won't accepting hundreds of thousands of people whose religion and experiences are antithetical to democracy weaken our democracy?
And why were we successful in Japan and South Korea - since these nations had no democracy before American occupation either? And why were we right to force the south to extend civil rights to blacks?
And don't we have a moral responsibility to help out all our brothers and sisters achieve their innate human rights and live free from oppression of all types, everywhere - isn't this what FDR said in the Four Freedoms speech and JFK in his inaugural speech? And don't we have a greater responsibility for Iraq and Iraqis - having invaded and occupied Iraq?
Yes... sure... but... er... um... we went to war for Israel and oil! All this democracy talk is an after thought!
Er um, no - Bush talked of its importance in his UN speech to the General Assembly in September 2002 - before the Congress voted to give him authority to go to was against Saddam. And, Israel warned us and said stopping Iran was the key to stopping worldwide jihadoterror. And we could have bought all the oil we wanted from Saddam; there was no need to occupy Iraq to get the oil. We could have simply removed the sanctions and allowed US BIG OIL COMPANIES to get all the contracts they could.
If Iran and Syria are influencing events inside of Iraq, and aiding the Iraqi elements which Iraq want Iraq to be less democratic and more extremist, then why shouldn't we influence Iraq and support the Iraqi elements which want to liberalize and have a democracy?
Because we don't belong in the region; Iran and Syria are in the region.
But we can't become isolationist, can we?
No, but we should only get involved internationally if the UN has approved it.
(Forget for a moment the sovereignty issue), and consider this fact: the UN has long approved our occupation and just recently increased its presence there - for the first time since their HQ in Baghdad was attacked. Now that we have their explicit approval, are you saying we should ignore it and the wishes of the democratically elected government of Iraq?
Never mind. Iraqis didn't attack us on 9/11; Saudis did, and their al Qaeda bosses are still in Afghanistan. Which is where we should be concentrating our forces.
Zarqawi and other al Qaeda leaders fled from Afghanistan and went to Iraq after we deposed the Taliban. And we and NATO ARE fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and we are killing hundreds of them every week - with the help of the Pakistanis. If al Qaeda wants to fight us in Iraq - and that's where our most of our troops are (along with an indigenous population increasingly alienated if not hateful of al Qaeda), then why should we go somewhere/anywhere else?
Er um... I dunno. 'Cause Bush stole the 2000 election in Florida, and the 2004 election in Ohio, and he and his rich-and-getting richer (as the poor are getting poorer) tax-cutting deficit-exploding closeted-gay fascist cronies are destroying the planet with their CO2!
PITY: THESE CONVERSATIONS ALWAYS SEEM TO END ON A BDS NOTE.
BDS: THE LAST REFUGE OF THE LEFT.